Fire Damaged Rough Rider Krag???

[MooseNugget]

I was wondering if you guys could please do me a favor?

I'm currently wintering in Georgia and all my research material is back home in Alaska. I'm looking for verification data on a Krag that supposedly is of Rough Rider linage:

Serial Number - 27892
Model - 1894

The firearm is in very rough condition and supposedly has been involved in a fire on top of San Juan (Kettle) hill. It caught fire and burned in a Spanish redoubt during a unsuccessful counter attack by Spanish cadet reserves...so the story goes? The cadets must have been hungry and used Krag carbines as kindling to cook Paella.

The Krag is all kinds of wrong as evidence by the attached photos: Appears to be Bannerman or Stokes Kirk modified, front sight/rear sight incorrect, stock incorrect, front band incorrect, etc.

Sorry but the photos were texted to me and that's all I have for now. I'm also unsure of the asking price but rest assured that the owner is asking a gazillion bucks for it.

Any help and valuation would be Greatly appreciated!

Regards,

Moose Nugget (aka Local Boy)

[butlersrangers]

Local Boy - I passed through Georgia, yesterday, en route back to Michigan.
I will look up #27892 later today.
The story sounds pretty far fetched. It looks to be a model 1892 rifle that was updated to model 1896 configuration in 1897 or post 1900.

[MooseNugget]

Thanks Chuck!

Bummer, we could have coordinated a meeting at my house (or somewhere in Georgia) and broke bread over a meal.

Praying for your safe travels back home to the peninsula!

[Ned Butts]

Well 27892 does turn up in Mallory 2nd eddition as being issued to AlvinC. Ash of Company G.
The biggest problem for me would be the 1894 marked receiver. The earliest Model 1896 carbines were built on 1895 marked receivers. I would scrutinize the receiver markings heavily before comitting
Interesting indeed

[Dick Hosmer]

I do not believe for one second that "1894" and "27892" occur (legitimately) on the same piece of steel!!!! That was an 1892 Rifle of undetermined number that has suffered the 1896 mods, and numerous other indignities at some later date. Don't waste any more time on it, unless it can be positively determined that trooper Ash was issued a rifle. Then, you might have something; otherwise it's basically trash (and you still have the stamping impossibility to overcome!). A very creative "story" but little else; just my $.02.

[MooseNugget]

Thank you Ned and Dick for your input and wisdom!

I'm still intrigued about this curiosity and will pursue more information about it's story, however, will I purchase it...? Who knows but the shadow?

Seems like some interesting Krags are popping out of the woodwork recently in the Great White North. Unfournately I'm not there to follow-up on these leads. Another one I'm currently trying to get more information/pictures about is supposedly Krag rifle serial# 404.
More to follow on that one.

Not very often do Krags pop up for sale in Alaska but when they do...I'm interested. Sorry to say but most of the gentleman who own/trade these firearms boarder on crazy, have no idea what they really have (or lie) and ask for way too much money!

[butlersrangers]

Ned checked Mallory's data for U.S. Krag serial number 27,892, which indeed is a model 1896 carbine issued to the 1st U.S. Volunteer cavalry, on 06/20/1898.

But the poor photos, that 'Moose Nugget/Local Boy' was provided, clearly shows a cut-down model 1892 rifle that had undergone Armory updating to model 1896 configuration.

The serial number on the 1894 dated action appears damaged, mutilated, 'stamped over' or just hidden. (It cannot legitimately be 27892).

This is clearly not a real carbine or 'Rough Rider carbine'.

(IIRC - Bannerman did buy fire damaged arms from the N.Y. Naval Yard fire in the early 1900's and resold them as "decorator carbines".
Those oddities were advertised around 1914 and were re-stocked with patched and altered 1903 Springfield stocks).

Mallory's research found number 26116 to be the highest serial number noted on a U.S. Krag receiver dated 1894.
This high number is probably an 'outlier'. Most of the 1892 Krags, with high numbers, fall in the 23K and 24K range, with a few in the 25K range.

IMO - The metal in the photos may show remnants of black enamel or 'stove pipe' paint and not fire damage?

[Culpeper]

I've stared at the serial number at different resizings and, without a better resolution, I can only say the number 2 does not lot look kosher. It looks like it is a skosh below the same line as 1894 and Springfield Armory.

[butlersrangers]

U.S. Rifle Model 1892, #404, is not a 'hit' in SRS data.

It has to have an interesting, but untold story.

I look forward to seeing pictures, showing the present state, of that early service rifle.

Good Luck in your Krag Hunting!

[MooseNugget]

Thanks BR for your research! I value your and the rest of the KCA members opinion's in high regard!

Too many inconsistences with this Krag. I'm going to have to put this investigation on hold till I arrive home in the next few weeks.

As far as the early serial number Krag (#404)...it turns out it was a communication error with my friend and the owner of the Rough Rider Krag in question. Somehow the Rough Rider Krag started out as having serial# 404. Then it morphed to serial# 206 and finally to the current serial# 27892. I asked my friend where the owner is getting numbers 404 and 206...we both haven't a clue? In fact, as Culpeper eluded to, it's very difficult to ascertain the true serial number?